"...F-35 Durability TestingFlying 1 1/2 times faster than the speed of sound and pulling nine times the force of gravity can really have an impact on an aircraft’s durability. Conducting durability testing on the F-35 is paramount to ensuring the F-35 will continue to dominate the skies for future generations. The F-35 Structures Development Team recently achieved 16,000 hours of buffet and maneuver cyclic loads testing on our F-35B durability test article BH-1. The testing simulates loads and stress on the airplane as if flown to the end of the envelope. 16,000 hours represents a full two lifetimes worth of F-35B operational use.

“Our durability test program for the F-35 has been a huge success,” said Bob Burt, director of F-35 structural testing. “Never before in aviation history have three aircraft variants, with significantly different design criteria, been static tested, drop tested and durability tested on two continents within a nine-year schedule window.”..."

"Successful completion of full scale durability test completed in structural test rig in our facility at Brough. A full scale durability test airframe of the F-35A aircraft has successfully completed its third life testing, equivalent to 24,000 hours of 'flying', in our unique testing facility at BAE Systems’ site in Brough, East Yorkshire. The airframe, known as AJ-1, is representative of the F-35A Conventional Take-Off and Landing (CTOL) variant of the jet.

While in the 350-tonnes structural test rig it has been subjected to and tested on the range of loads it would experience in actual flight, with durability tests carried out to simulate real life fleet usage based on projected operational requirements. Our durability test rig is the only one of its kind in the United Kingdom and it has supported the testing of AJ-1 since it arrived in Brough in 2009. It is fitted with more than 20 miles of wiring, 2,500 strain gauges and 160 loading actuators which are attached to the airframe during testing.

The F-35A durability test airframe will now leave the rig and travel to the United States where it will undergo further detailed inspections. Kathy Nesmith, F-35 Joint Program Office Airframe Team Lead, said: “The F-35 programme requires a service life of 8,000 flight hours. This is verified through durability testing to two lifetimes or 16,000 hours. Completing third life testing on the F-35A durability article will provide us the data to enable the warfighter to maintain and sustain this aircraft beyond 2050.”...

...[Andy Prendergast, Operations Manager for Structural and Dynamic Test at BAE Systems, said:] "We lead structural testing on the CTOL variant of the F-35 with Lockheed Martin, the programme’s prime contractor, who is also responsible for testing of the aircraft's other variants: the F-35B Short Take-Off; Vertical Landing (STOVL); and the F-35C Carrier Variant (CV)."

Both the F-35B and F-35C durability test articles have completed 16,000 hour second life testing and are continuing with additional testing to maximize the life of the aircraft...."

"F-35A Durability Testing is complete. The F-35A full scale durability test airframe left its structural test rig at BAE Systems in the UK and started its journey back to the US where it will undergo further detailed inspections. The airframe (AJ-1) successfully finished its third life testing -- this is equivalent to 24,000 hours of 'flying'. The F-35 program requires a service life of 8,000 flight hours verified through durability testing to two lifetimes or 16,000 hours. Third life testing completion on the F-35A provides significant data so the warfighter can maintain and sustain their aircraft for decades."

spazsinbad wrote:As I recall the airframe came by sea so it is being craned onto a ship nearby? Or maybe some road transport then by sea?

Well, I very much doubt that the F-35 airframe is being loaded into a ship or barge since there's no sea, river or water canal to be seen in the vicinity.

I also find a little bit odd the possibility of being loaded into a truck in order to be transported by road since it would make much more sense to simply to tear down a section of that wall and built (a permanent) road access directly to the facility.

However and suddenly something came into my mind in the meanwhile:- Perhaps it's being transported by train/rail and the tracks cannot be seen in the photo because they're hidden by the wall?

A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.

Well, I very much doubt that the F-35 airframe is being loaded into a ... or ... a truck ..

LOL. ric I usually like to read your posts, but this one is just silly.

"Well, I very much doubt that the F-35 airframe is being loaded into ..." anything.

Yeah, you're right. They are just dropping it into the sand ... maybe lowering it to 4 strong weight lifters... or using it as a wind chime in the breeze ... or maybe ....

I doubt very much that your comment has any connection to the scene and surrounding area, ie. all that is out of the frame ...

but that's just,MHOBP

PS I'm putting together a picture of me in a swim suit,, with towel, looking like I'm on the beach at Cancun, Mex. hoping it will make today's snow go away. I doubt very seriously it's snowing, seeing the sunset I've framed in that picture ... I doubt very much it's really snow ... I really really doubt it ...

Yes it is an odd environment with BAE Systems on the shore of the TIDAL River HUMBER Estuary UK as seen on the first JPG. Then we zoom in to see an abandoned airfield nearby with train line top of the pic in the next JPG. From Googie Erf.

For those unable to read text at the URLs above my apologies, at the time it was midnight my time & I could not be arsed.

Lightning strikes thriceRecently AerospaceTestingInternational

"BAE Systems’ structural test team at Brough has now completed a third cycle of F-35A fatigue testing...

"...Static testingPrior to the commencement of fatigue testing using AJ-1, a static load test campaign was carried out using a different F-35A airframe, known as AG-1.AG-1 was transported from the USA by sea in early April 2009, arriving at the port of Hull on the UK’s northeast coast. From there, it was transported by barge up the Humber Estuary, before being unloaded by crane at the Brough facility on April 25. The aircraft was one of three static test and three durability test airframes manufactured by Lockheed Martin to support the SDD phase of the F-35 program. A further 13 aircraft have been dedicated to flight testing in the USA...."

Well, I very much doubt that the F-35 airframe is being loaded into a ... or ... a truck ..

LOL. ric I usually like to read your posts, but this one is just silly.

"Well, I very much doubt that the F-35 airframe is being loaded into ..." anything.

Yeah, you're right. They are just dropping it into the sand ... maybe lowering it to 4 strong weight lifters... or using it as a wind chime in the breeze ... or maybe ....

I doubt very much that your comment has any connection to the scene and surrounding area, ie. all that is out of the frame

I won't say that my last post wasn't silly but I believe that you probably didn't read it correctly.I never said that the airframe wasn't being loaded on sand or loaded on "nothing". What I said was:- I doubt that it was being loaded on a ship or barge because there isn't any water to be seen in the vicinity of the photo although I can certainly concede that the "picture" doesn't show the "entire picture" (pun intended ) and there could be for example water behind the photographer and his or hers photo. Well spazsinbad certainly proved that there's a quite large body of water in that BAE's facility surroundings.- I also said that I doubted that it was being loaded on a truck because if this was the case why use a crane in apparently the middle of nowhere - trucks certainly can "navigate" around most parts of that complex. But then again, I admit that the photo may not show the entire picture.- And I also said that personally I believe that it could be loaded on a train (I implied a flatcar) and that on the right side of the wall there could be tracks (hidden by the wall) which IMO would make sense from what I can see in the photo.

Anyway, perhaps my mistake was making suppositions (silly, you say?). Anyway, the objective of these suppositions on my part were to try to figure out to where were they loading that airframe, that's it. Pure in simply curiosity...

blindpilot wrote:PS I'm putting together a picture of me in a swim suit,, with towel, looking like I'm on the beach at Cancun, Mex. hoping it will make today's snow go away. I doubt very seriously it's snowing, seeing the sunset I've framed in that picture ... I doubt very much it's really snow ... I really really doubt it ...

Well I guess that I'm not the only one posting a silly comment/post in this thread or having a "silly moment". Thanks for the solidarity my friend

Last edited by ricnunes on 22 Apr 2018, 01:28, edited 1 time in total.

A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.